GOVERNMENT FILES “THROW EVERYTHING AGAINST THE WALL” APPEAL IN THE PERKINS “BAD LAW FIRM, NO ACCESS FOR YOU!” LAWSUIT 3 DAYS AFTER ASKING TO DISMISS IT
You remember last week, right? When the government filed a motion to dismiss the Perkins lawsuit after getting roundly trounced for an illegal Executive Order targeting Perkins (and other law firms with similar EOs) as firmsona non grata and no longer to be graced with Federal contracts and security clearances or, even, allowed access to Federal facilities. You remember that, right?
And then you remember that motion was *unopposed*, meaning that the government had *conferred* with the plaintiffs (Perkins), and basically said “Hey, we’re going to file a motion to dismiss the case, you cool with that?” “Yeah, we’re cool with that.” “Ok, cool.”
Then the *very next day* the government filed a motion saying “Ha ha, our fingers were crossed, we didn’t mean it”, which really meant “Oopsie, we don’t know what the fork we’re doing, can we please take our motion to dismiss back?”
Well, three days after *that* (so this past Friday), the government filed a MASSIVE appeal to the Court of Appeals (District of Columbia).
By “massive” I mean that the brief is 97 pages, and the two attached exhibit files are 660 pages and 369 pages. (All included for Notes from the Front members – wheeee! A little light reading with your coffee. Or, perhaps, a martini would be more in order.) It appears that throwing everything against the wall is not reserved for the occupant of the White House with this administration.
In their appeal they include not just the Perkins case, but also three other similar cases, Jenner & Block, Wilmer Hale, and Susman Godfrey. Note that in *each* of these cases the Courts overwhelmingly sided with the law firms.
Their basic argument seems to be “You’re not the boss of me”, although they say it a bit more lengthily:
“Courts cannot tell the President what to say. Courts cannot tell the President what not to say. They cannot tell the President how to handle national security clearances. And they cannot interfere with Presidential directives instructing agencies to investigate racial discrimination that violates federal civil rights laws. Nor can they interfere with Presidential directives instructing agencies to review contracts or regulate government building access based on those same racial-discrimination and national-security concerns – especially where such directives have not yet been implemented.”
Along with that appeal brief are the two files of exhibits. They are massive because they contain nearly *everything* in there, including the transcripts of the court proceedings and other things from the other three lawsuits. Notes from the Front members, you’re gonna love skimming through these, because the transcripts are gold! I particularly like this one, which is from the Perkins hearing (Mizelle is the government’s attorney):
MR. MIZELLE: So in the very first, again, sentence relating to hiring Fusion GPS, which — they manufactured a false dossier, that is something that the very statement goes to the heart of national security. At the heart of the dossier were allegations that President Trump’s campaign improperly colluded with Russia; those were proven to be false, factually incorrect. Special Counsel Durham went through and found that every aspect of the dossier — not a single aspect of it was verifiable —
THE COURT: I have also read the Mueller report. So I wouldn’t say that — I am not going to get into a debate with you about it. I think that there are very big differences of view about whether — you cannot be saying that there was nobody involved in the 2016 Trump campaign that had any connection with any Russian; you can’t say that.
MR. MIZELLE: Your Honor, I believe —
THE COURT: So let’s not get into debate about that. I think what you are establishing is only confirming that there might be a viewpoint perspective difference here.”
“I have also read the Mueller report. So I wouldn’t say that.” BAM! đ
So why, after filing a motion to dismiss, would they request to dismiss the dismissal, and then a mere three days later file what appears to be a âHail Maryâ appeal? Hereâs how I envision it:
Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA): âHey boss, we conferred with opposing counsel, and they agreed to our dismissing the case, so we filed the motion.â
Boss: âWhy would you do that??â
AUSA: âBecause we donât have a snowballâs chance in hell of winning.â
Boss: âRetract that now! Move forward, it doesnât matter that we canât win, this is a great way to get our completely unprepared and inexperienced attorneys some experience, and at the taxpayersâ expense to boot!â
Notes from the Front members: The 97-page appeal brief, and the 369- and 660-page exhibit files, are in your inbox now.
Not a member? Join us to access all documents, our private chat, our private dropbox including all the Epstein files (even the disappeared ones), etc.. Plus your $5 a month helps support my efforts grabbing, purchasing, explaining, and storing documents before they can be disappeared (much of which I have to pay for out of my own pocket). You can join now below.
https://annepmitchell.substack.com/p/government-files-throw-everything
Source